Why not tho? Tanks dont win battles.
game was best around level 20 in campaigns. mostly period accurate for campaigns and fairly balanced(or at least you could easily grind past first few levels to get somewhat better weapons). all of that went to shit when they went past level 20 and 30 depending on campaign.
4 Likes
You’re welcome to share your squad loadout so i can point out various inaccuracies… your narrative of picking and choosing what you find difficult for yourself with a disguise you mean.
Do you also want mgs to be basically shooting in the dark if they’re not mounted? Gun jamming? WT realistic tank stats?
Please… do share these ideas of historical accuracy you have because BRV is anything but.
Spot on.
I.e. the way most campaigns originally launched with their original vision.
Before the power creep of MKB and Pz IV F2 in Moscow, before Fedorov, AS and RD in Berlin…
2 Likes
I would love to learn how much Fedorov 1912, Hino-Komuro and Ta-Se were used in WW2.
3 Likes
Yeah, the Campaign System was not perfect, but the merge replaced a poor system with a horrible one. I dont blame the players, but I do blame the game and the devs. Players are going to do what the game allows. That is a constant in any program development endeavour.
Back when we had bronze orders and silver orders, I always said that rarer weapons should have been more expensive than more common ones. Like Kar98k would be extremely inexpensive and an StG44 would have been much more expensive. That would make it so a player grinding would still need to equip his soldiers with inexpensive weapons. This replicates what really happened.
Additionally, the game also opened up squad organization incorrectly. Like, we didnt have “machinegunner squads” as the norm. Those were special units. Rather there were standards, like the germans had a standard of 10 man squads (which we cannot even do in the game), comprised of 1 MG34/42, 1 MP38/40, and 8 Kar98ks through most of the war. Later replaced by 9 StG44s and 1 MG42. It is impossible to make either squad in Enlisted, wheather its 2020 or 2026.
These are the changes I wanted to see made…instead, we got Fortnite with WWII skins.
2 Likes
That all sounds wonderful. Yes. I dont give a shit about game “balance”. I want an experience that places the user into an environment that replicates WWII as a historian.
Thats precisely why I avoid BR IV and V and your’e making my point for me.
i disagree. campaigns were much worse than merge. there were 2 big downsides of campaigns:
- inequality of weapons/vehicles. often i dominated enemy team just cause they had shit weapons/vehicles. remember camping on d-day hill and killing 10-15 stuarts on beach and enemy being helpless against me. this did wonders for newbie retention… come and be punching bag for veteran players for months, until you earn enough xp/silver to get actual counters to them.
- player ratio inequality. some campaigns had 2:1 player ratio(e.g. tunisia), while some others only had ~20-30% player advantage. you may not like the merge, but at least it gives 1:1 player ratio for both teams(well maybe not on crossplay off).
not to mention third downside which was inaccurate weapons/vehicles for certain campaigns(mostly obsolete and time traveling weapons).
that would make real shit game. in most battles one side was heavily outnumbered and/or had advantage in weaponry. premise of any game is that it needs to have balance. war is anything but balanced.
3 Likes
Alright. Hell let loose sounds right up your ally… enlisted is anything but and allows you to play how you want.
Not that your opinion is invalid but ill never understand why you and others are so persistent on trying to pick things that they don’t want or should adjust so it fits their fantasyland when this game will never be what you desire.
Your thoughts only provide dead negative feedback which i’m no stranger to giving mind you… like i referenced later in this comment you don’t even play it yet apparently want to nerf it when you STILL won’t play it for other various reasons… you just want to make it unenjoyable for others who do like to play there how THEY want.
You want to ply your way they want to play their way. thats the fun of a video game… if you dont like it then play a single player game like easy red 2 or what you say as a historian would describe so iirc hell let loose is pretty good there no? Minus the various cosmetics which is what you get in a game.
If you don’t like the game anyway and want it to be so perfect then go play games that do it right and quit trying to ruin it for those that enjoy it.
A game made by one developer originally, easy red 2 does just what you want provided historic battles with weapons that fought there… no choice in what you want to bring just what the commander ordered.
Likewise with yourself.
I’m also no stranger to being against things like br1 stuff as i’m not really related to but that’s for a different reason as it’s taking away dev power from things everyone would enjoy which honestly is BR2-3 weapons but that’s a whole other topic and personal opinion…
not getting something vs making something that’s totally fine where it stands worse like you can portray it as such a problem but play how you want and rifleman squads are no problem… just prop up with an mg like a historically accurate soldier would do… those players will still play like it’s cod just with a different class and you will still complain.
We ended up forwarding nerfing them, but in a different way compared to what’s proposed here
5 Likes